Why the study?
Does oral pre-treatment with rosuvastatin reduce infarct size following ischemia/reperfusion injury in a porcine model?
Does oral pre-treatment with rosuvastatin reduce infarct size following ischemia/reperfusion injury in a porcine model?
Oral pre-treatment with high-dose rosuvastatin reduces myocardial infarct size following ischemia/reperfusion injury in a porcine model via a nitric oxide-dependent mechanism, independent of cholesterol lowering.
High-dose statin pretreatment reduced infarct size in porcine ischemia/reperfusion; leaves open translation to human cardioprotection.
AIMS: The aim of this study was to test whether oral pre-treatment with rosuvastatin at a dosage giving clinically relevant plasma concentrations protects the myocardium against ischaemia/reperfusion injury and to investigate the involvement of nitric oxide (NO) and neutrophil infiltration. METHODS: Pigs were given placebo (n = 7), rosuvastatin (80 mg day(-1), n =7), rosuvastatin (160 mg day(-1), n = 7) or pravastatin (160 mg day(-1), n = 7) orally for 5 days before being subjected to coronary artery ligation and reperfusion. An additional group was given rosuvastatin 160 mg day(-1) and a nitric oxide synthase (NOS) inhibitor. RESULTS: Rosuvastatin 80 and 160 mg day(-1) resulted in plasma concentrations of 2.6 +/- 0.7 and 5.6 +/- 1.0 ng mL(-1), respectively. Serum cholesterol was not affected. Rosuvastatin 160 mg day(-1) and pravastatin limited the infarct size from 82 +/- 3% of the area at risk in the placebo group to 61 +/- 3% (P < 0.05), and to 61 +/- 2% (P < 0.05) respectively. Rosuvastatin 80 mg day(-1) limited the infarct size to 69 +/- 2%, however, this effect was not statistically significant. Rosuvastatin 160 mg day(-1) attenuated neutrophil infiltration in the ischaemic/reperfused myocardium. The protective effect of rosuvastatin 160 mg day(-1) was abolished by NOS inhibition. The expression of NOS2 and NOS3 in the myocardium did not differ between the groups. CONCLUSIONS: Oral pre-treatment with rosuvastatin limited infarct size following ischaemia/reperfusion without affecting cholesterol levels. The cardioprotective effect is suggested to be dependent on maintained bioactivity of NO, without influencing NOS expression.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Bulhak et al. (2005) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: